Hardly DougR, no one is going to be so convenient as to try and attack the USA in a way that it expects. To use the jargon, the whole point of asymmetric force is that a few individuals can achieve maximum impact with minimum effort compared to the defence capabilities (and hence spending) of the target.

Is US customs willing or able to disrupt commerce by opening and examining every container, parcel etc sent to the US? The US spends more per year on its intelligence and counter espionage services than the GDP of most countries, but they were unable to forsee let alone prevent the attacks two days ago. Of course there is now a great slamming of stable doors, and no doubt some of those involved will be caught, but don't think for a minute that yopu can kill a hydra by cutting of its head.

In this and other threads people noticably 'Spaw and bseed (welcome back Charles!) have pointed out that to defeat any opposition whether in war or paly, you need to understand them. The West, not just the US still fails to do this, and will continue to so at their peril. Name calling may be a natural reaction, and good for PR, but the lat thing these people are is cowards, deliberately flying a plane into its target at the cost of your life is the kind of action that gets VC's and CMH's when its our people.

Like everyone else I would like to see all terrorists removed from circulation, but there are two problems. Unless the 'cause' real or percieved is addressed someone will always take their place. Secondly how do we define a terrorist? I doubt if there is a country in the world that has not at some time supported people or organisations that have used 'terrorist' tactics. If the people who carried out this attack go first, who is next? UNITA?, PIRA?, Chechin rebels?, Indonesian troops? Please don't think I'm suggesting that we should not make a start, but at least let's be honest and consistent, and have a plan which goes beyond the immediate.

Pete M